Main menu

Tag Archives: government

Post navigation

I miss the days when news segments had real solid news worthy stories about local, national and international issues and that lasted longer than 10 minutes. I miss the days when journalism was about getting to the hard truth, finding evidence and bring those stories to the viewers at home. But lately I’ve found that news stations and journalism has become about stories that are trending on social media and will get the most buzz worth attention. The warrant for Justin Biebers arrest gained more air time than real current events that were affecting the lives of many Canadians and global citizens. The lack of coverage on prevailing issues affecting climate change and the Canadian environment is largely at fault by Prime Minister Harper’s communication directive that prevents scientist from speaking to the media without permission.

The Harper government has restricted the ability of Canadian scientist to speak to the public, media, and other scientist regarding climate change and other environmental issues. Scientist have been asked to exclude or alter technical information in government documents for non-specific reasons and have been prevented from responding to the media or the public. As a result, media coverage on these issues have significantly drop by 80% since 2007.Scientists are required to get permission from their political superiors before answering any media request. This hindrance has further reduced the number of request for climate change coverage and detail of accurate information within governmental reports. It is clear that the Canadian government is doing all that they can to monitor and restrict the flow of information especially concerning research into climate change, fisheries, and anything to do the Alberta Tar Sand.

Which leads us to question if Harper’s regime has begun to follow a Big Brother system, regulating and controlling the information that is readily available for the public. Without this information present it will guarantee an increase in public ignorance regarding these issues. It is obvious that the Harper government is more concerned with keep professionals from talking about these issues rather than fixing them.

Mr. Harper couldn’t care less about the environment and this form of censorship compromises the health and safety of Canadians. Scientists lose their ability to develop effective and sufficient policy laws and programs that are based on scientific evidence and facts that will ensure a better/safer environment for further generation.

Society has lobbied against many different international regulatory bodies for their form of censorship but it is time that Canadians stand up to the Harper government and gain back our freedom and the freedom of our scientist to do the duty to share and inform the public about their research and findings. The Canadian government must be held accountable for their actions, especially at the stake of the future generations. Canadians must raise up and force our federal government to be more transparent about their action.

Feel free to voice your comments, concerns, questions and opinions. And with that I leave with Rick Mercers views on muzzle on scientist.

But to me, development is complicated. There isn’t a clear definition that explains what development is other than is the process of change. However, that definition varies between individuals, groups, towns, and nations. Everyone has their own viewpoint of what is important to them and their regions.

So with that I ask you:

How do you decide what is important in development? To invest your time, effort, money and resources? To advocate and fight for? What serves more attention over the other?

To be honest, if someone came up to me and asked me those questions I wouldn’t be able to give them a simple answer. My perspectives of the key to development has shifted far to many times to count. When I came into the International Development program, I thought restructuring political systems were key, yet by the end of first year I became passionate towards the importance of water security. By the end of my second year I believed that development must incorporate economic structures and urban planning. But now with the help of a few of my friends, I have become more engaged with issues among women and minority groups.

I find myself in a limbo of what issues stands to be more precedent. Development is complicated. Everything is connected but there are many faults that lie within the political, economic and social systems. Within political, economic and social system, I think that longevity would be key to development. Therefore, I believe that the direction of development lies within sustainability.

The concept of sustainable development entered the minds of global citizens in the early 1970s as a concept that looked achieving an equilibrium between the economy and environment. However, sustainable development is more notably defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

Sustainable development does not only apply to the environmental and economic issues but it looks at the social implications as well. Worldly problems and issues are interconnected. For example, water scarcity and inequalities can impact community health with water contaminations, dehydration, access and further illnesses. As a result, this can impact the surrounding natural environment, habitats and animals and the local economy. Resources are becoming finite and populations are growing at a exponential rate. Problems link together and political regulatory bodies need to address these concerns through understanding the future implications. Through achieving sustainable development we will be able to achieve a global society that will become more inclusive, environmental conscience and economically feasible.

What is development to you? Feel free to comment and add your opinion on what the key is development.